153 Conn.App. 146
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Philip Marasco, an over-50 blueprint reading teacher in the Connecticut Regional Vocational-Technical School System, filed age discrimination complaints with CHRO and the EEOC after curriculum changes reduced standalone blueprint reading classes.
- Eli Whitney High eliminated its blueprint course for 2005–2006; Marasco was placed as a permanent substitute, later reassigned to W.F. Kaynor as a full-time manufacturing technology teacher in 2006.
- Marasco amended his administrative complaints to include retaliation based on subsequent disciplinary actions at Kaynor; he obtained a CHRO release and an EEOC right-to-sue letter and sued in state court alleging violations of § 46a-60 (Conn. Fair Employment Practices Act), the ADEA, and retaliation.
- The school system moved for summary judgment arguing (1) the ADEA claim is barred by sovereign immunity and (2) no genuine issues of material fact existed on the § 46a-60 discrimination and retaliation claims. Marasco opposed but submitted no evidentiary materials contradicting the defendant’s affidavits.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for the defendant on all claims but held the ADEA claim was not barred by sovereign immunity; the appellate court affirmed summary judgment on the § 46a-60 and retaliation claims but reversed as to the ADEA claim, remanding with direction to dismiss it for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ADEA claim against state agency is barred by sovereign immunity | Marasco argued ADEA claim could proceed in state court despite sovereign immunity | School system argued ADEA does not abrogate state sovereign immunity and claim is barred | ADEA claim is barred by sovereign immunity; remanded to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction |
| Whether curriculum change eliminating blueprint classes constituted age discrimination under § 46a-60 | Marasco contended change was designed to eliminate older teachers and he was treated differently | School system produced affidavits showing curriculum change driven by pedagogical/NCLB goals and assisted affected teachers; no contradictory evidence from Marasco | No genuine issue of material fact; summary judgment for defendant on § 46a-60 claim |
| Whether disciplinary actions at Kaynor constituted unlawful retaliation for filing CHRO/EEOC complaints | Marasco claimed discipline was retaliatory and different from treatment of similarly situated teachers | School system showed disciplinary records and lack of evidence that Kaynor officials knew of Marasco’s complaints; Marasco produced no evidence of knowledge or similarly situated comparators | No genuine issue of material fact; summary judgment for defendant on retaliation claim |
| Evidentiary sufficiency to defeat summary judgment | Marasco argued court improperly relied on defendant affidavits without contrary evidence | Defendant relied on admissible affidavits, depositions, and documents per Practice Book §17-45 | Court properly considered defendant’s evidence; Marasco’s conclusory assertions insufficient to create factual dispute |
Key Cases Cited
- Kimel v. Florida Bd. of Regents, 528 U.S. 62 (U.S. 2000) (ADEA does not validly abrogate state sovereign immunity)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (U.S. 1973) (burden-shifting framework for disparate treatment claims)
- Columbia Air Servs., Inc. v. Dep’t of Transp., 293 Conn. 342 (Conn. 2009) (sovereign immunity principles and exceptions)
- Levy v. Comm’n on Human Rights & Opportun., 236 Conn. 96 (Conn. 1996) (definition and inquiry for disparate treatment)
- Craine v. Trinity College, 259 Conn. 625 (Conn. 2002) (application of McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting under Connecticut law)